NEET-UG 2026: NTA claims viral OMR sheets were fabricated, warns of criminal action

The National Testing Agency (NTA) has stated that images of answer sheets from the NEET-UG 2026 examination, which were widely shared online, were digitally fabricated. The agency released this statement on Monday, warning that individuals involved in creating or distributing such materials could face legal consequences. The NEET-UG exam was initially held on May 3, but it was canceled due to allegations of a question paper leak. A second attempt was conducted on June 21. Results for the re-exam were announced on July 16. Following this, some candidates raised concerns that the optical mark recognition (OMR) answer sheets linked to their roll numbers did not match their own, appeared to have been swapped, or displayed fewer attempted answers than they believed they had completed. Reports from The Indian Express noted these allegations gained traction on social media platforms. In response, the NTA examined each claim individually and confirmed that its official records remained consistent in all cases reviewed so far. According to the agency, authentic answer sheets retained accurate roll numbers, booklet numbers, barcodes, candidate details, signatures, thumb impressions, and invigilators' signatures. Additionally, the scores reflected on these sheets aligned with the official answer keys and evaluation records. The NTA addressed the claims of five specific candidates, Avaneesh Srivastava, Pratibha Trivedi, Abhay Yadav, Lakshya Singh, and Arya Singh, who had publicly expressed discrepancies. For Srivastava, the agency stated that the genuine answer sheet containing his personal information was on file and had been sent to him during the response key challenge period. The circulated image, however, featured the name “Ajeet Singh,” a name not present in the NTA’s database. The agency suggested that the image might have been generated using artificial intelligence or optical character recognition tools, with identity fields altered. Trivedi claimed she should have received approximately 640 marks instead of 38. The NTA refuted this, stating that her actual answer sheet was available and had been emailed to her during the challenge window. The image in circulation was described as a heavily modified digital version. In Yadav’s case, the agency pointed out that his assertion of having left only five questions unanswered did not correspond with the official answer sheet, which indicated 44 unanswered questions. For Lakshya Singh, the NTA noted that the circulated image contained extra answer bubbles that had been artificially shaded. Arya Singh’s case involved an image that was deemed a digitally altered version of her real answer sheet. The agency highlighted that the timestamp of one invigilator’s signature had been manipulated from 3:45 pm to 2:45 pm, among other signs of tampering. The NTA outlined several techniques used to produce fake examination documents, including employing AI-based image tools to recreate printed sections of answer sheets, digitally overwriting candidate details while preserving barcodes and answer bubbles, and modifying marks or response counts on downloaded scorecards without affecting embedded barcodes. The agency emphasized that creating, possessing, submitting, or sharing such fraudulent documents constitutes a cognizable offense under the 2024 Public Examinations Prevention of Unfair Means Act. Legal actions could also be pursued under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Information Technology Act. The NTA warned that legal proceedings could involve third parties responsible for generating or disseminating forged documents. This clarification follows ongoing protests by the Cockroach Janta Party in Delhi.